Percolation Clusters of Organics in Interstellar Ice Grains As The

Percolation clusters of organics in interstellar ice grains as the incubators of life Saibal Mitra Email: [email protected] October 27, 2019 Abstract Biomolecules can be synthesized in interstellar ice grains subject to UV radiation and cosmic rays. I show that on time scales of & 106 years, these processes lead to the formation of large percolation clusters of or- ganic molecules. Some of these clusters would have ended up on proto- planets where large, loosely bound aggregates of clusters (superclusters) would have formed. The interior regions of such superclusters provided for chemical micro-environments that are filtered versions of the outside environment. I argue that models for abiogenesis are more likely to work when con- sidered inside such micro-environments. As the supercluster breaks up, biochemical systems in such micro-environments gradually become subject to a less filtered environment, allowing them to get adapted to the more complex outside environment. A particular system originating from a particular location on some supercluster would have been the first to get adapted to the raw outside environment and survive there, thereby becoming the first microbe. A collision of a microbe-containing proto-planet with the Moon could have led to fragments veering off back into space, microbes in small fragments would have been able to survive a subsequent impact with the Earth. keywords Origin of life, Astrobiology, Evolution 1 Introduction arXiv:1711.01945v7 [astro-ph.EP] 30 Sep 2019 While the fundamental biochemical mechanisms of living organisms are well understood, how these mechanisms arose in the early solar system is not known. The problem here is not so much to explain how particular components such as amino acids, nucleobases etc. can arise in a prebiotic setting, rather how the machinery of life that’s implemented by such components arose, starting from only these simple components. One way of attacking this problem is to consider life as it exists today and try to deconstruct it to see if a simpler, more primitive version could have 1 given rise to it. This has resulted in the RNA world hypothesis [1]. Here one assumes that RNA instead of DNA encoded genetic information and that RNA molecules were involved in catalytic processes that in modern living organisms are implemented by protein-based enzymes. There is then still a significant gap to bridge between simple prebiotic chemistry and the RNA world. As little progress has been made in the last few decades, we can ask what pre- vents us from getting to an explanation of how life came into being. Walker and Davies have recently argued that the problem is more rooted in basic physics or mathematics than in biochemistry [2, 3]. That the problem transcends biochemistry becomes clear if we considering models of artificial chemistry obtained by replacing the rules of chemistry by some arbitrary set of rules that describe the interaction between some set of building blocks. A challenge formulated in [4] is to demonstrate an artificial chemistry in which the transition to life appears, which is an unsolved problem. Intuitively the generic problem here is clear: We cannot see how simple building blocks will assemble themselves into complex machines. If we have an imperfect machine we can imagine that it could evolve to become a better machine. But if we start out with a machine that’s too dysfunctional, then this will simply break down, and a collection of building blocks can be interpreted as a totally broken down machine. This intuitive argument has been formulated in a more precise way by Eigen [5]. Here one invokes the fidelity of self-maintaining and replicating machines. In a simplified version of this argument, one considers a machine with N critical parts such that any defect in these critical parts will cause the machine to stop working. Such defects can arise due to external perturbations, and errors in the self-maintenance process and copying process can also lead to defects. For a set of such systems to be able to undergo exponential growth requires that the number of defects per critical part per reproduction time must be smaller than 1/N. Then because any system that starts out as some random concoction of building blocks can at best be a very low fidelity replicating machine, the number of critical parts cannot be large. Since a large number of parts is needed to implement the machinery needed for self-repair and copying with high fidelity, the randomly concocted system would first have to increase the number of critical parts, after which it could undergo Darwinian evolution to reconfigure the new parts to improve the fidelity. While the first part of such a process could conceivable happen e.g. due to merger processes, the Eigen limit on the fidelity precludes the second part. Just after a merger process, the fidelity will still be the same as what it was before the merger, while N will have doubled, making it likely that the system will fail to reproduce with a growth factor larger than 1. Given this fundamental problem, one may consider if life could have formed spontaneously, despite the astronomically low probability of elementary building blocks assembling themselves to form a living cell, one successful abiogenesis trial can be expected in about 105000 trials [6]. A theory known as panspermia [7, 8, 9, 10, 11] makes no assumptions about how life began, but explains the emergence of life on Earth by the arrival of pre-existing life in the cosmos. However if the spontaneous appearance of life from basic chemistry (abiogenesis) is to be invoked then the super-astronomical odds against of about 105000 can be overcome in a vast Universe almost infinite in size [12]. The theory’s main focus is the way life appeared on Earth from its assumed cosmic orgins, while 2 the origins of life from ordinary chemcial processes are left in the dark. However, even if we accept that in a large enough, possibly infinite universe, a spontaneous appearance of microbes from simple chemical compounds is possible, there are other objections against such a hypothesis. The fact that co-enzymes contain nucleotides fits in well within the RNA-World hypothesis [13]. These nucleotides could just as well be replaced by some other compound while preserving the ability to be able to bind with the enzymes they currently interact with as far as modern biochemistry is concerned, but in the RNA- World the nucleotides would have been needed for base pairing with ribozymes. Overwhelming odds against spontaneous creation thus continue to exist due the existence of biochemical relics. With this evidence against the spontaneous origin of life out of simple compounds in hand, we should turn back to tackling the fidelity problem. Let’s consider the simplest system that’s just able to reproduce with high enough fidelity to have a growth factor larger than 1. We can then ask how its simpler ancestral system could possibly have worked to get to high enough fidelity to repair itself and reproduce. Living organisms maintain their internal states out of thermodynamic equilibrium in a highly dynamic way. Then if we have sucha system that is the simplest system that can just about work this way, it follows that the ancestral system would have had to work in a more static way. The role of the static parts would be to protect the dynamic degrees of freedom from perturbations from the environment, as well as play a supportive role for the dynamic degrees of freedom that depend on it. For example, if certain enzymes are lacking in the ancesteral system, then certain fixed structures in the static system would have to catalyze the chemical reactions that are catalyzed by these enzymes. Then such an ancestral system could in turn have evolved from other ancestral systems with even less dynamic degrees of freedom. The original system that gave rise to life could have been a purely static object. This static object could then have been a vesicle within which the dynamic parts would appear later. A lot of work has been done on lipid membranes as such vesicles [14], the problem here is that such membranes in the early stages of life would have had to be simpler than the membranes modern cells use, while we need a far more protective environment than the interior parts of modern cells. Another objection against lipid membranes follows from thermodynam- ics. Living organisms maintain themselves far from thermodynamic equilibrium using their own dynamic degrees of freedom. If the ancestral system of the simplest would also succeed in doing that with less dynamic degrees of freedom, supported by a static structures then such a static structure should itself be an object that’s far from equilibrium. The lack of any dynamic processes to maintain the structure far from equilibrium then implies that the object would have to be in a metastable state. So, the sort of vesicle we’re looking for should unlike lipid membranes have a rigid molecular structure. Such vesicles would be able to have fixed molecular structures capable of acting as enzymes, as suggested above. The rigidity of the vesicle then implies that the vesicle won’t take part in reproductive processes. It will act as a micro-environment within which an entire eco-system of reproducing biochemical systems is housed. Lipid membranes can, of course, still play a role inside such a micro-environment. The question is then how and where such vesicles could have been forged. Clearly, very far from equilibrium processes are needed to yield far from equilibrium, metastable 3 objects.

Load more